Andrew Robathan: It is true. The council states that there exists a 12th-century charter, given by a 12th-century king—it could have been Henry II or possibly even the wicked King John—that allows Leicester city, which presumably refers to a predecessor of Leicester city council rather than the current organisation, to impose restrictions on markets to be held close to the city centre. I should stress that nobody can find the charter, although allegedly a copy exists. Leicester city council believes that it is allowed to ban any market within 6? miles of the city market. I do not know how that slightly odd measurement came about, because after all measurements were made in miles and furlongs.
	 It being Seven o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.
	 Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn .—[Steve McCabe.]

Andrew Robathan: As I was saying, in medieval times, measurements were made in miles and furlongs rather than ? miles, which does not quite fit in. Furthermore, the copy of the charter makes no mention of a distance from the city centre. It is suggested that 6? miles is the distance that a herd of cattle could be driven in a day or a decent walk for a medieval villein, serf or peasant—I would have thought that they could have gone a bit further, but never mind.
	The fact remains that the city council believes that it has the legal authority to impose restrictions and ban markets within 6? miles of the city centre where the city market is located. Blaby, in my constituency, is well outside the city boundaries. I have no problem with the city market, and when I go into Leicester—rarely—I often go there to shop. I certainly wish the market and its traders no ill.
	I understand, however, that increasing competition from supermarkets and new commercial shopping centres is probably affecting market trade. There are large supermarkets—Morrisons, I believe, on the old cattle market and a new development called Highcross—which must inevitably be in direct competition with the market, whereas farmers markets, held typically once a month, are not an enormous threat to custom at the city market. Apart from anything else, to drive into the city from my constituency village of Blaby takes some time. Traffic and congestion are often bad and one would have to pay to park on getting there. All those are deterrents to people who might wish to buy potatoes and sausages in the city market. Therefore, the idea that the farmers market in Blaby and the city market are in competition is palpable nonsense.
	Nevertheless, apparently the market traders are concerned that they should not lose their supposed position of market dominance over others. For that reason, they have persuaded the city council to enforce the charter. To be fair to the city council, it has recently allowed an extension of the number of farmers markets to one a month. The Minister, who thought I was being partisan earlier, might wish to know that the previous Liberal Democrat administration, supported by the Conservatives, would not allow one a month. Therefore, it is not a partisan issue.
	The magnanimity shown recently by the city council is only on the condition that the farmers market pays £300 for each day that it holds a market. The House will understand that that is a large amount to be paid for a small event, and it threatens the viability of the farmers market as a whole. At the same time, the Blaby social centre, which is akin to a village hall, holds a table-top sale to raise money for the social centre, which is a charity. I am sure that all hon. Members in the Chamber—I am delighted to see the hon. Member for Leicester, South (Sir Peter Soulsby)—have similar charitable events in their constituencies. That table-top sale typically earns between £60 and £80 on each occasion. Unbelievably, Leicester city council charges £20 for the privilege of holding that table-top sale.
	It is self-evident that in mediaeval times the layout of Leicester city might have been somewhat different, the buildings were different, there were no forms of transport other than by horse or horse and cart—possibly donkey—there were restrictive practices, and payments were made and taxes levied by means such as the charter. Life was altogether a little different without recourse to Topshop, Sainsbury's or Marks and Sparks. If anybody could produce the charter, it would be an interesting and historic document that should be placed in a museum, perhaps on the site of the city market.
	Nobody is ever going to accuse me of being a moderniser—I would be most grateful if my party leader did not hear that—but sometimes traditions become outdated and inappropriate. The charter is being used to restrict consumer choice and trade and has no justification whatever in the 21st century, even if there was apparently a test case in 1979 that upheld the right of Leicester city to dictate to others where they should have markets.
	In a radio interview yesterday, a Leicester city councillor told me that the council had a legal duty to uphold the charter. That sounds a pretty spurious explanation to me, and, indeed, the fact that the council is willing to waive the restriction in return for funds suggests that the letter of the law—which I do not think exists anyway—is not being observed.
	I wrote to the chief executive of Leicester city council last spring. She replied on 7 May that
	"the policy was amended recently to accommodate Blaby farmers market and I am happy to report this event has been very successful".
	She also wrote that the
	"table top sale.....is categorised as an occasional sale market",
	and that
	"all events are licensed within our market boundaries and it is important for legal purposes we maintain this position".
	I have struggled to find any reasonable justification for the rival markets policy. I very much doubt whether it is genuinely legal; it seems to me to be more a question of custom. I cannot believe that any reasonable person considers that Leicester city's jurisdiction should restrict consumers' choice and trading outside Leicester city. In short, the whole thing is nonsense: it is ludicrous.
	Furthermore, the council is acting in entirely the opposite direction to a public policy that many Members in all parts of the House would wish to be pursued—the desirability of buying local produce from local producers locally, for instance at farmers markets. Indeed, I believe that on the one hand the Government give money to support farmers markets, while on the other—with its holistic policy—Leicester city council takes the money away as a tax. Incidentally, there is taxation without representation here.
	I ask the Government to examine the position and make a very simple ruling—I suspect it would not require any primary legislation—that the charter, should it exist, be annulled. We elect Governments to govern, and I do not think that this would be a difficult case to fight, but I hope that, if there should be a ridiculous legal challenge from the city council or market traders, judges—who sometimes disappoint me—will have enough sense to throw out the challenge.
	If Leicester city council objected to such a course, I would ask it what possible justification there was for the operation of a rival markets policy outside the jurisdiction of its civil authority. I would suggest to my aggrieved constituents that the current situation might be worth testing in law. I cannot believe that the council or Leicester city market traders would be so foolish as to bring an injunction against a farmers market, or even better, a charity table-top sale; but I believe that, if they were so stupid, the case would be easily dismissed by any judge who took a sensible and pragmatic view of life.
	Again, I ask the Government to examine the position. It does not require a great deal of time, effort or bureaucracy, and it certainly requires no money. It requires a simple ruling, and possibly a simple order or statutory instrument—I am not sure that it requires even that—to ensure that my constituents and local farmers in Leicestershire can hold farmers markets or charity table-top sales wherever they want in my constituency, without the interference of a local authority that has no jurisdiction over the area except via a spurious and outdated charter.
	I shall end on that note. I wish to hear what the Minister has to say. I am also delighted to see that the former leader of Leicester city council, the hon. Member for Leicester, South is present. If he wishes to speak, I shall have no objection if the Minister too does not object.